Skip to content

BALT vs FEBW

Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF

BALTBCboe

AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Feb ETF

FEBWCCboe

Overlap

Expense ratio

BALT −0.05pt a year

BALT0.69%FEBW0.74%

Avg volume · 30D

BALT 62.5×the volume

BALT569KFEBW9.11K

3Y return · a year

FEBW +4.0pt

BALT+8.0%FEBW+12.0%

BALT vs FEBW Performance

Oct 31, 2025 – Oct 30, 2026

+5.9%BALT+8.8%FEBW

Oct 31, 2025 to Oct 30, 2026. BALT +5.9%. FEBW +8.8%. Use the arrow keys to read each point.0%2%4%10%Oct 2025Apr 2026Oct 2026
Expense ratio
BALT 0.69%, better
FEBW 0.74%
Fund size
BALT $3.47B
FEBW $204M
1Y total return
BALT +5.9%
FEBW +8.8%, better
Yield (12M)
BALT No data
FEBW 0.00%
Holdings
BALT 3
FEBW 2
Avg volume (30D)
BALT 569K sh, better
FEBW 9.11K sh
NAV per share
BALT $34.93
FEBW $36.58
52W range

ETF.net Grade

BALT: Cost 65, Risk 65, Mission 78, Tradability 66, Holdings not scored, Durability 82. FEBW: Cost 37, Risk 47, Mission not scored, Tradability 47, Holdings 54, Durability 54.
Pillar letters and Scores for BALT, FEBW, with each pillar’s weight
PillarBALTFEBW
Cost30% weightB65HigherD37
Mission25% weightA78Not scored
Risk15% weightB65HigherC47
Tradability15% weightB66HigherC47
Holdings10% weightNot scoredC54
Durability5% weightA82HigherC54

Rank among S&P 500 Buffer 20% funds

Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

Same Category. BALT and FEBW are both graded against the same 24 S&P 500 Buffer 20% funds, so their Grades compare head to head.

S&P 500 Buffer 20%⁠

Category · 24 funds
See all 24 ›

BALT ranks 1st and FEBW 18th of 24 funds in the S&P 500 Buffer 20% Category.

  1. Rank 1BBALTInnovator Defined Wealth Shield ETFScore 66
  2. Rank 2BPSFDPacer Swan SOS Flex (January) ETFScore 61
  3. Rank 17CAUGWAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Aug ETFScore 46
  4. Rank 18CFEBWAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Feb ETFScore 44
  5. Rank 19CMARWAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Mar ETFScore 42

Our read on each fund

ETF.net Research

BALTBInnovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF

FEBWCAllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Feb ETF

In short

BALT Most buffer ETFs hand you a cushion once a year. BALT rebuilds a 20% one every three months: four fresh starts against S&P 500 drawdowns. The trade-off is that the cap resets with it, and it starts low.

FEBW Deep-buffer S&P 500 exposure on a February clock: FLEX options absorb the first 20% of a year's losses, and a ceiling on the upside pays for that cushion. Priced at the category median, one rung in AllianzIM's monthly ladder.

Stated mandate

BALT The fund seeks to track the return of SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust (SPY), subject to a cap, while buffering investors against losses. It targets a 20% buffer during each three-month outcome period and resets quarterly.

FEBW The Fund seeks to provide a buffer against the first 20% of losses of its underlying ETF during the applicable outcome period, using FLEX Options that reference the underlying ETF.

Why people hold it

  • BALT Deep and short-dated: it targets a 20% buffer against losses in the S&P 500 ETF it references, over a three-month outcome period, then resets for the next quarter.innovatoretfs.com
  • 0.69% a year, under the typical fee in its deep-buffer group, and it has been running the quarterly reset since launching in 2021.
  • One of the larger funds doing 20% buffers on the S&P 500, and one of the strongest implementations in that peer group.
  • FEBW Aims to buffer the first 20% of losses in the SPDR S&P 500 ETF Trust over each outcome period, built from FLEX options rather than a manager's hedging hunch.
  • The terms are written down in advance: 20-point buffer, SPY as the reference, a February 1 to January 31 outcome period. You know the rules before you own it.
  • At 0.74%, it charges exactly the median for deep-buffer funds in its peer group. No premium for the AllianzIM name.
  • A February start date in a series that runs month by month (MAYW covers May), so entry points can be staggered across the calendar instead of stacked on one reset.

Worth knowing

  • BALT A deep buffer over a short window buys a low ceiling. The cap is set fresh each three-month period, and it is far tighter than what annual buffer funds start with.
  • The 20% cushion is measured from the start of each outcome period. Buy mid-quarter and the buffer and cap you actually own differ from the headline terms.innovatoretfs.com
  • Cheaper 20% buffer options exist: PBFR at 0.50%, Pacer's Swan SOS Flex funds (PSFJ, PSFM) at 0.49%.
  • FEBW The cushion is bought with a ceiling. Each period's cap is set at the start and can shift year to year, so upside in a strong market is limited by design.
  • Buffer math runs from the period's start. Buy in mid-period and you inherit whatever protection and headroom remain, not a fresh 20 points.
  • Thinly traded, so the spread is a real part of your cost. Cheaper deep-buffer siblings exist too: PBFR at 0.50%, PSFJ at 0.49%.

Full BALT profile⁠

Full FEBW profile⁠

BALT vs FEBW Holdings

How we measure overlap

Each holding counts at its smaller weight in the two funds, summed over the full Holdings. Sector, country and asset class use the same rule on each fund’s split. Cash, FX and derivative lines stay out of the counts. Two bond funds get no overlap figure.

BALT vs FEBW Cost

Overpaying FEBW vs BALT

$878

On $10,000 over 30 years. 7% growth a year before fees, expense ratio only.

  • BALT 0.69%

    $13,429

  • FEBW 0.74%

    $14,307

$10,000
30 years

Cost over time

  • BALT 0.69%
  • FEBW 0.74%
  • Overpaying
One line per fund, from year 0 to year 30. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$5K$10K$15K051015202530FEBW $14,307BALT $13,429

Year by year

YearBALTFEBWOverpaying
10$1,232$1,319$87
20$4,697$5,015$318
30$13,429$14,307$878

Expense ratio

  • 0.69%BALT, cheaper
  • 0.74%FEBW
  • Middle half of S&P 500 Buffer 20% funds
  • Median 0.74%

BALT 9th cheapest of 24 funds

FEBW 10th cheapest of 24 funds

BALT vs FEBW Dividends

Last 12 months to Oct 30, 2026
Yield (12M)
BALT No data
FEBW 0.00%
Payout (12M)
BALT None
FEBW None

Distribution history

Per share, 2024, same scale for both

BALTAll BALT payments⁠

No distribution history available.

FEBW1 paymentAll FEBW payments⁠
One bar per payment. 1 payment in 2024. Jan 16, 2024 $0.04. Use the arrow keys to read each point.$0$0.052024

BALT vs FEBW Risk

Fall from peak · 5 years

This chart needs five years of history for both funds.

Risk facts

VolatilityStd dev, 3 years
BALT 2.4%, betterFEBW 5.1%
Return per unit of riskSharpe ratio, 3 years
BALT 1.37FEBW 1.39, better
Worst fallMax drawdown, 5 years
BALT −4.9%FEBW −8.8%since Feb 2023
Market sensitivityBeta, 5 years
BALT 0.18FEBW 0.40

Popular comparisons

  • BALTBvsPSFDB

    Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Flex (January) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • FEBWCvsPSFDB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Feb ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Flex (January) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • BALTBvsPSFJB

    Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Flex (July) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • FEBWCvsPSFJB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Feb ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Flex (July) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • BALTBvsPSFOB

    Innovator Defined Wealth Shield ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.69% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.
  • FEBWCvsPSFOB

    AllianzIM U.S. Equity Buffer20 Feb ETF · Pacer Swan SOS Flex (October) ETF

    Expense ratio
    0.74% · 0.49%
    Category
    Same Category. Both funds are graded against the same funds, so their Grades compare head to head.